info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
No Room For Hall of Famers In the Foxhole
68 views
Skip to first unread message
Jim Bauch
May 27, 2016, 11:18:48 PM5/27/16
to
I think I've heard this story before, but:
http://montrealgazette.com/sports/hockey/nhl/stu-cowan-canadiens-passed-up-chance-to-land-larry-robinson
Donny Cape, Robinson’s longtime friend and business manager, says the Canadiens could have hired the Hall of Famer instead of the Sharks, but chose not to.
Cape says he spoke with Marc Bergevin after he was hired as the Canadiens’ general manager in May 2012 and the GM had hired Michel Therrien as his head coach on June 5 of that year.
Robinson had already decided he didn’t want to return to New Jersey the next season and Cape says a meeting was set up with Bergevin when Robinson was going to be in Montreal on July 6. But before that meeting was held, Cape says Bergevin called him back to say the meeting was off because he had already hired someone else (J.J. Daigneault) as an assistant coach to work with the defence. Daigneault and Bergevin grew up together in Montreal and were minor-hockey teammates — along with Mario Lemieux — during the late 1970s for the Ville-Émard Hurricanes.
Cape says Bergevin asked him to let Robinson know he had hired someone else and that the meeting was off. An upset Cape responded: “You call him.”
Bergevin did.
Cape, who has represented Robinson since the early 1970s, said he is still shocked that the Hall of Famer wasn’t at least granted an interview with the Canadiens.
***************
I don't want to fall into the trap of assuming that just because Robinson was a better player, that he must be a better coach than Daigneault. But it's pretty shabby treatment to schedule an interview with Robinson and then cancel it because you couldn't wait to hire your buddy.
Jim
http://montrealgazette.com/sports/hockey/nhl/stu-cowan-canadiens-passed-up-chance-to-land-larry-robinson
Donny Cape, Robinson’s longtime friend and business manager, says the Canadiens could have hired the Hall of Famer instead of the Sharks, but chose not to.
Cape says he spoke with Marc Bergevin after he was hired as the Canadiens’ general manager in May 2012 and the GM had hired Michel Therrien as his head coach on June 5 of that year.
Robinson had already decided he didn’t want to return to New Jersey the next season and Cape says a meeting was set up with Bergevin when Robinson was going to be in Montreal on July 6. But before that meeting was held, Cape says Bergevin called him back to say the meeting was off because he had already hired someone else (J.J. Daigneault) as an assistant coach to work with the defence. Daigneault and Bergevin grew up together in Montreal and were minor-hockey teammates — along with Mario Lemieux — during the late 1970s for the Ville-Émard Hurricanes.
Cape says Bergevin asked him to let Robinson know he had hired someone else and that the meeting was off. An upset Cape responded: “You call him.”
Bergevin did.
Cape, who has represented Robinson since the early 1970s, said he is still shocked that the Hall of Famer wasn’t at least granted an interview with the Canadiens.
***************
I don't want to fall into the trap of assuming that just because Robinson was a better player, that he must be a better coach than Daigneault. But it's pretty shabby treatment to schedule an interview with Robinson and then cancel it because you couldn't wait to hire your buddy.
Jim
Habscout
May 28, 2016, 12:21:21 AM5/28/16
to
I remember Robinson being interviewed on TSN690 back in the summer of 2012. He mentioned that he had talked to Bergevin about interviewing for the position but had asked for some time before coming to Montreal for the interview for business reasons. He had a flood on his horse farm in Florida and he was travelling there to deal with the clean up from it. Bergevin and/or Therrien apparently were impatient and didn't want to wait, instead interviewed and hired Daigneault.
Personally, my theory is Therrien felt threatened with the idea of having a Stanley Cup winning coach as his assistant. What's ridiculous with that notion is, Robinson does not aspire to ever be a head coach again, due to stress issues [see his Wikipedia page, citation #5]. He's more comfortable in an assistant's role where he can work with developing defencemen, the results appear obvious due to the successful development of the San Jose defencemen. The decision to not interview & hire Robinson also leads to an interesting discussion on PK Subban, since TSN690 discussed how Robinson would have been an influential mentor to Subban.
Personally, my theory is Therrien felt threatened with the idea of having a Stanley Cup winning coach as his assistant. What's ridiculous with that notion is, Robinson does not aspire to ever be a head coach again, due to stress issues [see his Wikipedia page, citation #5]. He's more comfortable in an assistant's role where he can work with developing defencemen, the results appear obvious due to the successful development of the San Jose defencemen. The decision to not interview & hire Robinson also leads to an interesting discussion on PK Subban, since TSN690 discussed how Robinson would have been an influential mentor to Subban.
Mike
May 28, 2016, 7:33:40 AM5/28/16
to
record of success whereas Therrien has a track record of poor
development of young players.
To me I think what happened was that Therrien was picked as coach and
then did not like the idea of Big Bird as an assistant as it would be a
threat to him. Think about last year for example. Well, for starters
last year wouldn't have happened with Robinson as defensive coach, that
much I'm convinced of but for shits and giggles lets say it did.
Therrien would have been gone by December and Robinson (who can parlez
vous la ding dong) would have been head coach. Therrien would have none
of that.
Imagine - JJ Daigneault over a proven successful coach and hall of
famer. Jesus H. Talk about errors of judgment. In hindsight, that should
have been our first clue that something was not right with our current
GM. Snappy dresser and funny guy, no question. But he's not brain trust
material, that much is certain.
Mike
May 30, 2016, 10:41:33 AM5/30/16
to
On 16-05-28 12:18 AM, Jim Bauch wrote:
https://twitter.com/HabsLinks/status/737038888301133824
Two things strike me about Mr Molson's tweet
1. He didn't say when Robinson decided to go to San Jose. If after being
told he was not wanted in Montreal, Robinson decided to go to SJ then Mr
Molson's post is 100% factually accurate, however misleading it may be.
2. The fact that he's being flushed into the open to comment on this is
wonderful. It means he's feeling the heat. He better get used to it. If
this team falters out of the gate or if Price isn't ready to play,
imagine the heat he'll feel then? Make or break year coming up for this
generation of players and for the current team management.
Gerry
May 30, 2016, 11:00:40 AM5/30/16
to
Personally, I don't care one way or another whether Larry Robinson did or didn't want to come here, or what the order of events was. But I definitely do like that, per Mike's Pt.#2, the heat is on these guys, and Molson felt obliged to respond.
Folks need to keep the heat on.
Cronyism is not exactly novel in NHL circles. Guys are always going to hire their buddies, and that even makes sense to some degree... you want to work with people you are familiar with, and who you feel will mesh well with your philosophies, etc.
It goes without saying that Bergevin would choose Daigneault in some capacity. I would have been shocked if he hadn't.
What matters after, however, is performance. If the cronies are doing the job, no issue. Although we are giving a negative connotation by using a term like "crony", I'm sure there are countless cases around the NHL of people working well with their buddies, new coaches or managers coming in and filling their staff with guys they are familiar with, and nobody is going to bat an eye... if they are actually competent and the success is there. Even if the "crony" displaces or pre-empts the hiring of a former team Hall of Famer.
Where things are interesting for the Habs is that we're now in a position to question the competence of some of those "crony" appointments after a dismal season. Our PP sucked massively. I feel like our defense has developed very poorly, and the passive style they play is a contributor to the team's poor performance. I don't care anymore about what happened in the past with the hiring/non-hiring of Robinson. Spilt milk under the bridge. What I care about is what the organization does going forward.
It has to start with even recognizing that there is a problem. I really don't see that the braintrust has even reached that initial stage yet, unfortunately. But the more heat that is applied, at all levels on all fronts, the more questions are asked, the more scrutiny... the more likely we are to at least have somebody in the chain arrive at that crucial first step of recognition.
l8r,
Gerry
Folks need to keep the heat on.
Cronyism is not exactly novel in NHL circles. Guys are always going to hire their buddies, and that even makes sense to some degree... you want to work with people you are familiar with, and who you feel will mesh well with your philosophies, etc.
It goes without saying that Bergevin would choose Daigneault in some capacity. I would have been shocked if he hadn't.
What matters after, however, is performance. If the cronies are doing the job, no issue. Although we are giving a negative connotation by using a term like "crony", I'm sure there are countless cases around the NHL of people working well with their buddies, new coaches or managers coming in and filling their staff with guys they are familiar with, and nobody is going to bat an eye... if they are actually competent and the success is there. Even if the "crony" displaces or pre-empts the hiring of a former team Hall of Famer.
Where things are interesting for the Habs is that we're now in a position to question the competence of some of those "crony" appointments after a dismal season. Our PP sucked massively. I feel like our defense has developed very poorly, and the passive style they play is a contributor to the team's poor performance. I don't care anymore about what happened in the past with the hiring/non-hiring of Robinson. Spilt milk under the bridge. What I care about is what the organization does going forward.
It has to start with even recognizing that there is a problem. I really don't see that the braintrust has even reached that initial stage yet, unfortunately. But the more heat that is applied, at all levels on all fronts, the more questions are asked, the more scrutiny... the more likely we are to at least have somebody in the chain arrive at that crucial first step of recognition.
l8r,
Gerry
Mike
May 30, 2016, 2:45:29 PM5/30/16
to
trouble next season. If they go into self protection mode where they
worry about their access to the team and the locker room then things
will continue on as before until it gets to the point where the whole
team is circling the drain. Its easy to ask hard questions then because
its too late. Therrien needs to be on the hot seat almost from day 1
with no wiggle room. If Markov gets 30 mins a game then he needs to
answer why and never mind the second guessing BS either. If that's his
response then challenge him on that too. Reporters are there to ask
questions and second guessing is part of what they do. Coaches answer
those questions which is part of what they do. Bergevin needs to be
flushed from the foxhole too and needs to be challenged on any glib
answers he gives (i.e. playstation, foxhole etc) so that he knows his
honeymoon is over.
The press needs to do its job, long story short.
Mike
May 30, 2016, 3:55:04 PM5/30/16
to
On 16-05-30 12:00 PM, Gerry wrote:
https://twitter.com/MarcPDumont/status/737313461236060161
Molson appears to be splitting hairs. Why not just come out and say "we
hired JJ, end of story". The fact that it appears Molson needs to make
up a story is very telling.
Jim Bauch
May 30, 2016, 4:53:46 PM5/30/16
to
Of course, players have a little more discretion when it comes to one-on-one interviews, responding to emails and texts, etc. But honestly, what good is that kind of relationship if it never leads to anything? When was the last time you read a story that provided some insight you would never have gotten but for a reporter's good relationship with a player? We can't even rely on them for consistent gossip -- right now, half the reporters insist that Subban is hated in the room, others say there's no problem. And none of them supply any real specifics.
I think there's an even more basic explanation. I think a lot of these reporters are just plain intimidated. I think the aforementioned Larry Brooks is an asshole, but some of his colleagues could learn something from him: I suspect that most reporters live in terror of a player or coach getting in their face, and/or they crave the approval of these people they envy and admire.
Jim
0 new messages